using contextual teaching and learning (ctl) …

https://doi.org/10.24815/eej.v12i3.19189

USING CONTEXTUAL TEACHING AND LEARNING (CTL)

APPROACH TO IMPROVE STUDENTS’ SPEAKING ABILITY

Ramzi Yusyac*

Asnawi Muslem

Burhanuddin Yasin

Universitas Syiah Kuala, Banda Aceh

ABSTRACT

The objective of this research is to investigate the implementation of

Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) to improve students’

speaking skills in the aspects of accuracy, clarity, and fluency. This

research employed a quantitative method in nature. A pre-experimental

design with pre-test and post-test was used. The population of this

research was all second-year students. The sample of this research was

one of the second-year classes chosen by using the purposive sampling

technique. The instrument used in this research was a speaking test:

pre-test and post-test. The data collected were analyzed statistically.

The results showed that the implementation of contextual teaching and

learning (CTL) improved students’ speaking skills in terms of

accuracy, clarity, and fluency. The result of Wilcoxon showed the value

of Asymp. Sig (2-tailed) for accuracy, clarity, and fluency is 0.000

which means that the resulting test is less than the minimum

requirements of the statistics range (0.05). Therefore, the use of CTL in

teaching and learning speaking is very beneficial for students to

improve their speaking skills. Thus, the hypothesis of this research was

accepted. There is a significant improvement in students’ speaking

skills after they were taught by using CTL.

Keywords: accuracy, clarity, CTL, fluency, student speaking skill,

teaching speaking for English

INTRODUCTION

* Corresponding author, email: [email protected]

ENGLISH EDUCATION JOURNAL (EEJ), 12(3), 460-476, October 2021

461

The ability to communicate by using English is relevant since

English has been widely used in global communication. Therefore,

English was taught at every school level in Indonesia, from elementary

up to university. In learning English, we need to master the four

language skills consisted of listening, speaking, reading, and writing.

Among those four skills, speaking has played a significant role as a

means of communication. Furthermore, Harmer (2007) states that

speaking is an important part of daily human life. Harmer further says

that people create a social relationship as a human being through

speaking interaction. According to O'Malley and Pierce’ (1996),

speaking seems to be the most important skill a learner should acquire.

One of the responsibilities of an English teacher is to enable students to

communicate effectively through oral language. Nunan (1991) states

that mastering the art of speaking is the most significant aspect of

learning a second or foreign language. He further says that the success

of learning a second or foreign language is based on terms of the ability

to carry out a conversation in the language. Therefore, it is essential

that in the language teaching process to focus on speaking skills.

However, mastering speaking is profoundly difficult for some

students. According to the students of MTsN 04 Pidie district, they find

it hard to accomplish the principal's obligation to speak English during

school. The preliminary study (an interview with students on 12 and 15

November 2018) showed that most students still felt hard to speak

English by using the past tense. There are only four of twenty students

who have no problem with fluency, clarity, and accuracy when they

speak in English. It means that more than 75 % of the population

interviewed have trouble in speaking English using the past tense. The

problem was assumed (an interview with an English teacher, on 16

November 2018) to be due to the irrelevant approach used by an

English teacher in teaching speaking and the student failures to use the

language based on the context. An appropriate approach plays a

significant role in the teaching and learning process. This assumption is

supported by Basil (2015) who pointed out that the learner’s problem-

solving ability can be accelerated with the use of an appropriate

approach.

Based on the previous explanation, the researcher is interested

in implementing Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) approach to

helps teachers and students to relate the meaning and real-world

situations with the subject matter in the right way (Johnson, 2002;

Sears, 2002). The main reason speaking skills should be taught using

Using Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) Approach to Improve Students’

Speaking Ability (R. Yusyac, A. Muslem, & B. Yasin)

462

contextual teaching and learning is because of a tendency to focus on

the idea that students learn better when the environment to learn is

discovered naturally. Learning will be more effective when the child

experiences what he is learning, not just knowing it. As stated by

Berns, Robert, Patricia, and Erickson (2001), CTL is one of the

approaches which help students to connect what they want to study to

the real-life situation to construct and apply the new knowledge to their

lives. Berns et al. (2001) further state that CTL motivates the learners

to take charge of their learning and to relate the knowledge and its

application to the various contexts of their life.

LITERATURE REVIEW

Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL)

CTL is a conception of teaching-learning which relates the

subject matter content to the real-world situation and makes

connections between knowledge and its applications to real-life

situations as family members, citizens, and workers (Berns et al.,

2001). It implies that CTL helps students connect the content of subject

matters they are learning to the life context in which that content could

be used. Thus, this learning approach brings meaning in the learning

process in which as they strive to attain learning goals, they draw upon

previous experiences and build upon existing knowledge.

CTL is a method of teaching a foreign language, which

developed knowledge based on constructivism theory. According to

this theory, learners are self-builders of their learning that occurs

through a mental process in a social context or communicate settings,

and teachers as facilitators generate learning by creating the expected

environment and/or utilizing the process (Al Mahmud, 2013). It implies

that the learning process only occurs when students process new

information or knowledge in such a way that it makes sense to them in

their frames of reference (their inner worlds of memory, experience,

and response). In this case, they can find the relationship between the

subject matter and the real-world situation. Therefore, the role of

teachers in the CTL approach is to help students to relate subject matter

content to real-world situations. The teachers also need to motivate

students to make connections between knowledge and its applications

to their lives.

In CTL, the learners have the main role in the learning process.

The learner’s role within CTL is described in the following terms: The


463

role of the learner is as a client who has problems and needs the

counselors to help in the learning process, and he is also the object of

learning. The implication for the learner is that learner should

contribute as much as they achieve, and thereby learns independently.

The learner takes the main role in the activity in language learning. The

learner should be active in the learning process and the activities

created based on the principles of CTL. The interaction and relationship

between the teacher and the learners can be observed within the

classroom procedure. The process will depend on the contribution of

learners. It means that learners can explore their ability in speaking.

CTL approach may be helpful in the speaking class because the

learners take the main role in every activity in language learning.

Moreover, Harnish and Lynch (2003) mention that implementation of

CTL positively impacted students’ speaking achievement since it

enriches subject matter and increases students’ mastery of subject

matter. Those are some basic theories that convince the writer to

research Teaching Speaking through Contextual Teaching and Learning

Approach.

Principles of Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL)

Seven principles should be developed by a teacher in applying CTL

(Ruhimat, 2012): constructivism, inquiry, questioning, learning

community, modeling, reflection, and authentic assessment. The

explanation of every principle is as follows.

Constructivism

Constructivism promotes effective learning methods to

help students put the material they have learned into long-term

memory. As Brown (2001, p. 56) states that meaningful

learning subsumes new information into existing structures and

memory systems and the resulting association links create

stronger retention. Constructivism is the underlying thinking

(philosophy) of CTL. It means that knowledge is built by people

systematically. Knowledge is not the facts, concepts, or

methods to be remembered. In this case, people must construct

the knowledge and give meaning through real experience

Inquiry

Joyce and Weil (2009) mentioned that inquiry is a

teaching method that allows students to discover by themselves

the knowledge that they did not know before. The purpose of

this inquiry method is to help students develop their intellectual



464

and skills arising from questions. Inquiry is the core of

contextual teaching-learning activities. It is a cycling process of

observing, questioning, investigating, analyzing, and

concluding. In other words, the students find out something by

themselves. In this process, the students have a chance to

observe the phenomenon. They will try to explain and describe

their observation. Based on their observation they will try to test

what they have observed and make the conclusion.

Questioning

According to Gattis (2002), a question is one of the

most important tools in guiding and extending students' ability

to learn. It can help the teachers to develop their strategy to

enhance students' work and minds. Therefore, it will be

effective when it allows students to become fully involved in

the learning process. In terms of lesson planning, teachers

significantly think about the types of questions for students. The

teachers likewise need to clear the goals of questions to their

students. Through this process, a lesson plan will help teachers

to plan good questions with answers sessions.

Learning Community

Learning communities serve as a gentle introduction to

the world of group work. Participation within learning

communities helps individuals learn how to better interact with

peers in collaborative working environments and to help foster

better teamwork abilities (Parker, 2009; Romsdahl & Hill,

2012; Schoonheim-Klein, Wesselink, & Vervoorn, 2012). In

addition, learning communities are good at increasing effort and

time spent working with peers and faculty among those who

participate in them (Rocconi, 2011).

Modeling

Modeling is an underlying concept of social learning

theory developed by Albert Bandura (1977). This theory is the

development or expansion of traditional behavioral learning

theories. Through social learning practice, a person can learn

through observation (observation learning) of a model. Bandura

(1977) states that learning practice would be exceedingly

laborious and dangerous if people had to rely solely on the

effects of their actions to inform them what to do. Fortunately,

most human behavior is learned observationally through

modeling: from observing others, one forms an idea of how new


465

behaviors are performed, and on later occasions, this coded

information serves as a guide for action.

Reflection

Self-reflection is a process to look back at someone's

experience to take lessons to be learned by themselves and then

compile an action plan to reduce the gap or gap that still exists

between expectations and reality (Gibbs, 2010). Reflection is a

way of thinking about what we have learned. Students and

teachers review and respond to the events, activities, and

experiences. They also record what they have learned, felt, and

appeared new ideas. This element usually occurs in post

activities. Self-assessment (to borrow Underhill’s term of

reflection) occurs to enable learners to take more responsibility

to help their progress. Further, Underhill (1987) states that self-

assessment can be introspective, where the learner is asked back

on his foreign language experience and rate himself against

some state.

Authentic Assessment

Contextual teaching-learning is intended to build

knowledge or skill in meaningful ways by engaging students in

real-life situations or authentic context. Thus, using authentic

assessment is needed to reflect the students’ actual competence

to the subject matter. There are four types of assessments which

are work assessment, portfolio assessment, project assessment,

and written assessment. The examples of the authentic

assessments are discussion or debates and expressing the idea of

the text.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design The objectives of this research are to find out the

implementation of CTL approach significantly affect the students’

ability in the aspect of accuracy, clarity, and fluency. Following these

speaking objectives, this study employed a quantitative method in

nature. This research uses a quantitative approach in presenting the

data. The technique used in this research is an experiment. The aim is

to find the effect of contextual teaching and learning implementation on

students’ speaking ability. The researcher used experiments because it

is a powerful technique to evaluate cause-and-effect relationships.



466

Populations and Samples The population in this research is all of the second-year students

of MTsN 04 Pidie (nine classes). The total number of students is

279. The sample of this research was one of the second-year classes

chosen by using the purposive sampling technique.

Research Instrument The instrument used in this research is a test: pre-test and post-

test. Both pre-test and both tests dealt with some questions about the

simple past. However, it dealt with different topics. The speaking

ability test in this study focused on the three components; clarity,

accuracy, and fluency.

Techniques of Data Collection The data are obtained by using pre-test and post-test. The pre-

test was conducted before implementing the teaching speaking process

through the Contextual Teaching and Learning Approach in the

experimental class. Meanwhile, the post-test was conducted after

implementing the Contextual Teaching and Learning Approach. The

test contained some questions related to three aspects of speaking

focused in this study. The test generally consists of some questions

about the ability of the second-year students of MTsN 04 Pidie in

mastering speaking and whether or not there was an effect of

implementing CTL on students’ speaking ability.

Techniques of Data Analysis Data analysis is an effort by the researcher to get the data

accurately (Nazir, 1999). In analyzing the data from pre-test and post-

test, the researcher used SPSS. The brief difference in the result of the

pre-test and the post-test were analyzed by using some procedures such

as mean, standard deviation, and Wilcoxon Test.

RESULT AND DISCUSSION

Speaking Skill Improvement in Accuracy

The students’ accuracy is determined from the students’ use of

the correct grammar and various words used (word choices). The

descriptive statistic result of the pre-test and post-test scores of

accuracy is presented in the following table.


467

Table 1. Descriptive Statistic of Accuracy Scores

N Range Minimum Maximum Sum Mean

Std.

Deviation Variance

Accuracy_Pre-

Test 43 1 2 3 95 2.21 .412 .169

Accuracy_Post-

Test 43 1 3 4 158 3.67 .474 .225

Valid N

(Listwise) 43

Table 1 displays the descriptive statistic of the accuracy scores

in pre-test and post-test. The analysis result of the accuracy scores

shows that the highest score of accuracy in pre-test is 3 and the lowest

score of accuracy in pre-test is 2. The mean of pre-test is 2.21 and the

standard deviation value is 0.41. Meanwhile, the highest score of

accuracy in post-test is 4 and the lowest score of accuracy in pre-test is

3. The mean of post-test is 3.67 and the standard deviation value is

0.47. It shows that the mean of post-test is higher than the pre-test

which means that the implementation of CTL in teaching speaking

improved students’ accuracy in speaking ability.

Furthermore, in order to find out the distribution of the data of

the accuracy scores, the researcher used normality test. The result of the

normality test is presented as follows.

Table 2. Results of Normality Test of Accuracy

Accuracy_Pre-

Test

Accuracy_Post-

Test

N 43 43

Normal Parametersa,b Mean 2.21 3.67

Std. Deviation .412 .474

Test Statistic .485 .428

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000c .000c

Table 2 displays the result of normality test of the accuracy

scores. The table shows that the significance value of Asymp. Sig. (2-

tailed) is 0.00 or less than 0.05 (Asymp. Sig. < 0.05). It indicates than

the data is not normally distributed. Therefore, the nonparametric test is

applied (Pallant, 2011). In this case, the researcher applied Wilcoxon

Rank Signed test. The details result of Wilcoxon Rank Singed test is

presented as follows.

Table 3. The Result of Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test of Accuracy



468

N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Accuracy Post-Test –

Accuracy Pre-Test

Negative Ranks 0a .00 .00

Positive Ranks 42b 21.50 903.00

Ties 1c

Total 43

Based on Table 3, Wilcoxon rank test of accuracy scores shows

that there is no negative rank of total participant so the test can be

carried out to the next stage of analysis by Wilcoxon statistics below.

Table 4. Test Statistic for Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test of Accuracy

Scores

Accuracy_Post-Test -

Accuracy_Pre-Test

Z -5.823b

Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) .000

Based on the result of test statistics in Wilcoxon test result table

above, the result of the table shows that there are 0,000 in sig. (2-tailed)

which meant that the result test is less than a minimum requirements of

statistics range (0,05). It means that the first hypothesis (Ho) is denied

and the second hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. It shows that there are

statistically significant differences in the accuracy scores in the pre-test

and the post-test. It means that CTL strategy is significant in improving

students’ accuracy in speaking ability.

Speaking Skill Improvement in Clarity

The students’ clarity scores are determined from their

pronunciation and articulation. Students with excellent pronunciation

and clear articulation without mistakes reach the high scores and vices

versa. The descriptive statistic of the clarity scores is presented in the

following table.

Table 5. Descriptive Statistic of Clarity Scores


Std.

Deviation Variance

Clarity

Pre-Test 43 1 2 3 93 2.16 .374 .140

Clarity

Post-Test 43 1 3 4 143 3.33 .474 .225

Valid N

(Listwise) 43


469

Table 5 displays the descriptive statistic of the clarity scores in

pre-test and post-test. The analysis result of the clarity scores for the

pre-test shows that the lowest score of clarity in the pre-test is 2. The

mean of the pre-test for clarity is 2.16 and the standard deviation value

is 0.37. Meanwhile, the highest score of clarity in the post-test is 4 and

the lowest score of clarity in the pre-test is 3. The mean of the post-test

is 3.33 and the standard deviation value is 0.47. It implies that the mean

of clarity in the post-test is higher than the mean of clarity in the pre-

test. It means that the implementation of CTL in teaching speaking

improved students’ clarity in speaking ability.

Furthermore, the researcher also used a normality test in order

to find out the distribution of the data of the clarity scores. The result of

the normality test for clarity scores is presented as follows.

Table 6. Results of Normality Test of Clarity

Clarity pre-test Clarity post-test

N 43 43





Table 6 displays the result of normality test of the clarity scores.

The table shows that the significance value of Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) is

0.00 or less than 0.05 (Asymp. Sig. < 0.05). It indicates than the data is

not normally distributed. Therefore, the nonparametric test, in this case

Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test is also applied to find out the significance

difference between the pre-test and post-test for the clarity scores

(Pallant, 2011). The details result of Wilcoxon Rank Singed test for the

clarity scores is presented as follows.

Table 7. Results of Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test of Clarity Scores

N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Clarity Post-Test –

Clarity Pre-Test



Ties 4c

Total 43

Based on Table 7, Wilcoxon rank test of clarity scores shows

that there is no negative rank of total participant thus the test can be




470

Table 8. Test Statistic for Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test of Accuracy

Scores

Clarity Post-Test – Clarity Pre-

Test Z -5.719b


Based on the result of test statistics in Wilcoxon test result table

above, the table shows that there are 0.000 in sig. (2-tailed) which

meant that the result test is less than the minimum requirements of

statistics range of 0.05. It implies that the first hypothesis (Ho) is

denied and the second hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. It shows that there

are statistically significant differences at 0.05 in the mean scores in the

pre-test and the post-test. It means that CTL strategy is significant in

improving students’ clarity.

Speaking Skill Improvement in Fluency

Students’ fluency scores were given based on their ability to

speak smoothly without many pauses. The descriptive statistic result of

the pre-test and the post-test scores of fluency is presented in the

following table.

Table 9. Descriptive Statistic of Fluency Scores


Std.

Deviation

Fluency pre-

test 43 1 2 3 100 2.33 .474

Fluency post-

test 43 1 3 4 166 3.86 .351

Valid N

(Listwise) 43

Table 9 displays the descriptive statistic of the fluency scores in

the pre-test and the post-test. The analysis result of the fluency scores

for the pre-test shows that the highest score is 3 and the lowest score of

fluency in the pre-test is 2. The mean of the pre-test for fluency is 2.33

and the standard deviation value is 0.47. Meanwhile, the highest score

of fluency in the post-test is 4 and the lowest score of clarity in the pre-

test is 3. The mean of the post-test is 3.86 and the standard deviation

value is 0.35. It implies that the mean of fluency in the post-test is

higher than the mean of clarity in the pre-test. It means that the


471

implementation of CTL in teaching speaking improved students’

fluency in speaking ability.

Furthermore, the researcher also used normality test in order to

find out the distribution of the data of the fluency scores. The result of

the normality test for fluency scores is presented as follows.

Table 10. Results of Normality Test of Fluency

Fluency Pre-

Test

Fluency Post-

Test

N 43 43





Table 10 presents the results of normality test by using

Kolmogorov-Smirnov test. The results shows that the Asymp sig. (2-

tailed) is 0.00. It is less than 0. 05 or α value. It means Ho is rejected and

Ha is accepted. It is concluded that the data of fluency scores is not

normally distributed. Therefore, the nonparametric testis also applied to

find out the significance difference between the pre-test and the post-

test for the fluency scores. The details result of Wilcoxon Rank Singed

test for the fluency scores is presented as follows.

Table 11. Results of Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test of Fluency Scores N Mean Rank Sum of Ranks

Fluency post-test –

Fluency pre-test



Ties 2c

Total 43

Based on Table 11, Wilcoxon rank test of fluency scores shows

that there is no negative rank of total participant so the test can be


Table 12. Test Statistic for Wilcoxon Rank Signed Test of Fluency

Scores

Fluency Post-Test – Fluency Pre-

Test

Z -5.781b




472

Based on the result of test statistics in Wilcoxon test, Table 12

shows that the Asymp. Sig. (2-tailed) value is 0.000 which means that

the result test is less than the minimum requirements of statistics range

(0.05). It implies that the first hypothesis (Ho) is denied and the second

hypothesis (Ha) is accepted. It shows that that there are statistically

significant differences in the mean scores in pre and post speaking test

in term of fluency. This result also implies that CTL strategy is

significant in improving students’ fluency.

4.1. Discussion

After the implementation of teaching speaking by using the

CTL method, it was found out that the students’ speaking test scores

were significantly improved. The activity during the implementation of

CTL in the classroom gives students a chance to think about accuracy

before they speak. It gives the students a general topic (e.g., personal

experiences at famous places) and put them in groups to talk about the

topic using the proper grammar, vocabulary, and expressions. During

the group discussion, they talked about their experiences using past

simple tense, vocabulary for times of the day, and many else. Then,

they practiced on the topic and tried to use the proper grammar, words,

and expressions. The result of this present study is relevant to the CTL

theory in which the accuracy aspect is increased because of the

students’ ability to talk based on reality or their own experience. Thus,

they already had the idea of the things they want to say and are capable

to express their idea in a foreign language.

Based on the CTL theory of curriculum and teaching

methodology, learning will be more effective when the learning

materials are related to the student's experiences and interests (Sanjaya,

2009). It helps students to relate to what they are learning because they

have background knowledge related to the topic, also they are actively

involved in the learning process in the classroom. This present study is

in line with the theory by Sanjaya (2009), in which the students in CTL

class were more active because they were trained to speak about what

they already knew. They found that the material is related to their own

life. Therefore, students found the material as an interesting topic.

The results of this study is in line with the theory of Berns et al.

(2001) which is the CTL approach helps students connect the content

they are learning to the life contexts in which that content could be

used. Students then find meaning in the learning process. As they strive

to attain learning goals, they draw upon their previous experiences and


473

build upon existing knowledge. By learning subjects in an integrated,

multidisciplinary manner and appropriate contexts, they can use the

acquired knowledge and skills in applied contexts.

Furthermore, the result of this study is supported by Adams

(2005), which described that this type of teaching method can

positively influence learning outcomes. It is reasonable to suggest that

simulation of real-life problems has the potential to increase motivation

by allowing students to feel their learning is more relevant and

meaningful to their own lives. Also, working in a small group, students

explain things to each other to reinforce their learning, building a

stronger knowledge foundation that can feed into creativity. Hence, the

learning process becomes meaningful because it is close to their daily

life. It can therefore be said that CTL is an effective method to teach

speaking because it encourages the student to actively speak up such as

making the relationship between what they are learning and what they

are experiencing in the real life.

A learning community in the CTL approach arranged for the

students to learn in groups. It gave a better result than learning alone

since students will share their knowledge to help other friends who

have difficulties. Crawford (2001) states that during the implementation

of CTL, students are learning in the context of sharing, responding, and

communicating with other learners (Crawford, 2001). Cooperative

learning sets group learning instruction in which the students cooperate

to achieve the goals of learning (Slavin, 1995).

It helps students to work and succeed as a team. They

participate in a team to achieve the aims of learning. Most students will

feel less self-conscious and can ask questions without feeling

embarrassed when they work with peers in a small group discussion.

Another fact of cooperative learning is that it can be counterproductive.

For example, some students may not participate in the group process

while others may dominate the group members may refuse to accept or

share responsibility for the group work. The same limitation has also

occurred in this present study. When the students work in a group,

some students did not want to take a part in making dialogues. They

seemed to give the responsibility of making the assignment to their

friends who actively participated in classroom discussions.

Based on the theory of CTL, the students are trained to work in

a group for sharing their ideas with their friends without feeling afraid.

Johnson, Johnson, and Smith (2013) as cited in Muliani, Maurisa, and

Nurusshobah (2016) also added that in cooperative groups, students can



474

engage in discussions in which they construct and extend conceptual

understanding of what is being learned. CTL leads the students to relate

the topic of discussion with their real world. By applying CTL, students

also have the opportunity to force their minds to develop critical

thinking skills.

CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS

Conclusions

The objective of this research is to investigate the

implementation of Contextual Teaching and Learning (CTL) to

improve students’ speaking skills in the aspects of accuracy, clarity,

and fluency. After the implementation of teaching speaking by using

the CTL method, it was found that the students’ speaking scores are

significantly improved. The result of the Wilcoxon test showed that the

value of Asymp. Sig (2-tailed) for accuracy, clarity, and fluency is

0.000 which means that the resulting test is less than the minimum

requirements of the statistics range (0, 05). This SPSS result implies

that the students’ clarity, accuracy, and fluency are significantly

improved after the researcher taught the students by using the CTL

approach. The scores improvement is also shown by the mean scores

before and after the implementation. The mean score of the pre-test for

accuracy, clarity, and fluency are 2.21, 2.16, and 2.33. The mean scores

of the test are respectively 3.61, 3.33, and 3.86. This notion proved the

hypothesis that there is a significant effect on the quality of the

students’ speaking ability in terms of fluency using the Contextual

Teaching and Learning approach in the teaching process.

Suggestions The implementation of CTL approach in teaching speaking

provides positive effects on students’ accuracy, clarity, and fluency. It

was suggested for the English teachers to use comedy movies in

teaching speaking to improve students’ speaking ability. However, the

researcher suggests English teachers to control the classroom activities

and the group members' participation during the teaching-learning

process because the implementation of CTL requires students’

participation. Furthermore, in choosing the topic of the material, the

teacher should consider the students’ background to avoid causing

offense.


475

References

Adams, K. (2005). The sources of innovation and creativity. (ERIC No.

ED522111). National Center on Education and the Economy.

Al Mahmud, A. (2013). Constructivism & reflectivism as the logical

counterparts in TESOL: Learning theory versus teaching

methodology. TEFLIN Journal, 1(2), 237-253.

Bandura, A. (1977). Social learning theory. Prentice-Hall, Inc. New

Jersey.

Basil, C. E. O. (2015). Effects of constructivist method of teaching on

students' achievement in financial accounting: issues and

challenges for accountancy education development. Knowledge

Review (33) (2).

Berns., Robert, G., Patricia, M., & Erickson. (2001). Contextual

teaching and learning: preparing students for new economy. The

Highlight Zone: Research @Work No.5. ERIC, (5).

Brown, H. D. (2001). Teaching by principles: an interactive approach

to language pedagogy (2nd Ed). New York: Addison Wesley

Longman, Inc.

Crawford, L. M. (2001). Teaching contextually: research, rationale,

and techniques for improving student motivation and

achievement. Texas: CCI Publishing, Inc.

Gattis, K. (2002). A look at productive tutoring techniques user’s

guide. (2nd Ed.). Raleigh: North Carolina State University.

Gibbs, G. (2010). Using assessment to support student learning. Leeds

Met Press.

Harmer, J. (2007). The practice of english language teaching. (3rd Ed.).

London and New York: Longman Group.

Harnish, D., & Lynch, D. L. (2003). Contextual teaching and learning:

lessons learned from teacher preparation through novice teaching.

University of Georgia.

Johnson, B. E. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: what it is and

why it's here to stay. SAGE Publications.

Johnson, D. W., Johnson, R. T., & Smith, K. A. (2013). Cooperative

learning: improving university instruction by basing practice on

validated theory. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching. 25.

85-118.

Joyce, B. R., Weil, M., & Calhoun, E. (2009). Models of teaching.

Boston: Pearson/Allyn and Bacon Publishers.



476

Muliani., Maurisa, S., & Nurusshobah. (2016). Intasc standard cores:

raising students' english modality competence. Lingua Cultura,

10(2). 111-115. http://dx.doi.org/10.21512/lc.v10i2.929

Nazir, M. (1999). Metode Penelitian (Research method). Jakarta:

Ghalia Indonesia.

Nunan. (1991). Practical English Language Teaching. Singapore:

Graw Hill.

O’Malley, J. M., & Pierce, L. V. (1996). Authentic assesment for

english language learners: practical approaches for teachers. New

York: Addison-Wesley, pp. 268

Pallant, J. (2011). SPSS survival manual: A step by step guide to data

analysis using the SPSS program. 4th Ed. Allen & Unwin,

Berkshire.

Parker, R. (2009). A learning community approach to doctoral

education in the social sciences. Teaching in Higher Education,

14(1), 43–54.

Rocconi, L. M. (2011). The impact of learning communities on first

year students' growth and development in college. Research in

higher education 52 (2), 178-193.

Romsdahl, R. J., & Hill, M. J. (2012). Applying the learning

community model to graduate education: Linking research and

teaching between core courses. Teaching in Higher Education,

17(6), 722–734.

Ruhimat, T. (2012). Kurikulum dan pembelajaran (Curriculum and

learning). 2nd Ed. Rajawali Pers: Jakarta.

Sanjaya, W. (2009). Strategi pembelajaran berorientasi standar proses

pendidikan (Educational process standard oriented learning

strategy). Jakarta: Kencana Media Group.

Schoonheim‐Klein, M., Wesselink, P. R., & Vervoorn, J. M. (2012). A

community of learners in the evidence‐based dental clinic.

European Journal of Dental Education, 16(1), 174–179.

Sears, J. S. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: a primer of

effective instruction. USA: Phi Delta Kappa Educational

Foundation.

Slavin, R. (1995). Cooperative Learning: Theory, research, and

practice. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Publishers.

Underhill, N. (1987). Testing spoken language: a handbook of oral

testing. London: Cambridge University Press

using contextual teaching and learning (ctl) …

Documents